User Ratings

ease 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 2 / 5
features 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 3 / 5
design 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 3 / 5
support 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 2 / 5

Rate This Project

Login To Rate This Project

User Reviews

  • Ok, so... The installer for the mingw manager isn't working right. It's having some trouble downloading from the sourceforge servers, there's something wrong with either the sourceforge servers or the files uploaded there. Actual review: It's a pretty good compiler, I use it because my college uses it. SO yeah. It's consistent and reliable. If you install it correctly. But sometimes that's not a decision you get to make.

  • "All of MinGW's software will execute on the 64bit Windows platforms" - so does it include 32 or 64 bit compilers?

  • Great tool .... of course. I manage to install it three weeks ago but now .... IMPOSSIBLE. I would like to agree with others unhappy with the installer. Or is it the sourceforge site ?

  • First, the other reviews are mostly pretty silly and unusable. "Thanks, nice app!" "Works great" etc. I guess if you want to give some stars, you have to write *something*. I started using MinGW at the request of a coworker. I work from home frequently, and use cloud-based file storage to make that easier. I installed MinGW at work, found it to be OK, and then a few weeks later, went back home to install it there. I got the graphic installer UI which seems rough and incomplete -- no select all function etc -- and on top of that, I got a different version of MinGW! So, right off the bat, I was dealing with the side effects of using a toolchain which is constantly rocking and rolling its changes. It would be NICER if there were a "long term support" vs. "bleeding edge" kind of distinction such as is made on projects like Ubuntu, so users can choose what is more important: stability or the latest features. Don't get me wrong, so far I have found the gcc toolchain implementation to be quite good. I have gotten my project running and don't have any severe gripes with the compiler itself. However, with Visual Studio Express 2010 available for free download, I don't quite understand why C/C++ developers *who do not need cross-compilation on Mac or Linux/BSD* would struggle with something so "minimalist". And, compared to the slick, easy, full-featured IDE provided with the Visual Studio *free* download -- easier to learn that, say, Eclipse -- hacking away on the command line or using _make_ just seems so .... primitive and unproductive. For those who need what MinGW can uniquely offer, I applaud the effort and thank the developers for their gift to the FSF-based community at large. I don't wish my critique of the project to in any way diminish my awe and astonishment at the time these folks put into _giving away_ some really useful software.

    1 user found this review helpful.
  • Thanks for providing this kit. Yet I have to say, the usability of the Installation Manager is terrible...why not provide a "select all" option as button or menu and let the user do hundred clicks?